Example Data Table
| Factor | Example Score | Example Weight | Weighted Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Source Reliability | 9.0 | 14 | 12.60 |
| Evidence Integrity | 9.5 | 18 | 17.10 |
| Chain of Custody | 8.5 | 16 | 13.60 |
| Completeness | 7.5 | 12 | 9.00 |
| Base weighted score | 84.70 | ||
| Bonuses: hash verified, signed log, synchronized time | +9.00 | ||
| Penalties: one metadata gap | -1.50 | ||
| Final evidence quality score | 92.20 | ||
Formula Used
Base Weighted Score = (Σ((Factor Score ÷ 10) × Weight) ÷ ΣWeights) × 100
Bonus = Hash Verified + Signed Log + Independent Validation + Time Synchronization + Legal Hold
Penalty = (Tamper Flags × 4) + (Metadata Gaps × 1.5) + Custody Break + Unauthorized Access + Missing Original
Final Score = Base Weighted Score + Bonus − Penalty
Score Bounds = Final score is limited between 0 and 100.
The model emphasizes defensibility, integrity, and traceability. You can tune weights to fit incident response, audit review, or forensic examination priorities.
How to Use This Calculator
Enter the case details first. Add an assessor name, case ID, evidence label, evidence type, framework, and review date.
Score each factor from 0 to 10. Higher values indicate stronger evidence quality for that control area.
Adjust weights to reflect your review focus. Higher weights increase the impact of that factor on the base score.
Record bonuses for strong controls, such as verified hashes or independent validation. Add penalties for tamper flags, gaps, or custody failures.
Press Calculate Score. The result appears above the form, directly below the page header, with a breakdown table and summary.
Use the CSV button for spreadsheets and the PDF button for a printable assessment report.
FAQs
1. What does this score measure?
It measures how trustworthy, complete, and defensible a cybersecurity evidence set appears after weighting quality factors, bonuses, and penalties.
2. Why are weights editable?
Editable weights let teams prioritize different review goals, such as forensic integrity, audit traceability, or operational incident response needs.
3. What score range is considered strong?
Scores from 80 to 100 usually indicate strong evidence quality, provided no critical issues such as custody breaks or unauthorized access exist.
4. Can a high base score still produce a weak final score?
Yes. Serious penalties from tampering, missing originals, or unauthorized access can significantly reduce otherwise strong weighted performance.
5. Why include bonuses like hash verification?
These controls strengthen defensibility by proving integrity, repeatability, and sound evidence handling during collection, preservation, and review.
6. Is this calculator a legal determination tool?
No. It supports structured assessment and documentation, but legal admissibility still depends on jurisdiction, policy, expert review, and procedure.
7. Should every factor use the same weight?
Not always. Equal weights work for general reviews, but specialized investigations often emphasize integrity, custody, or corroboration more heavily.
8. When should evidence be remediated before use?
Remediate before use when the score is moderate or low, or when critical conditions indicate evidence handling weaknesses.